In what way is it passive aggressive? That was not my intention and if it comes across like that I apologise.
It’s more that i’m not sure how the counter to someone discussing tactics for Stansfield is just oh so you think he’s shit then. It doesn’t make sense. If you go on twitter it is essentially always the response, it has been the response in several threads on here in the last week.
I’m not attacking anyone as individuals, I just don’t get how instead of explaining why somebody thinks the current tactics are great in response to them being changed it just is levelled at someone that they don’t rate him as a player.
Blimey Hugh, not serious, again. Like you said suns out, just pulling yer leg.
Bluesince62 F.E.A.Far too passive/aggressive.
Reported.
The reading comment was too far and I apologise. I’m not trying to upset anyone, i’ll be more considerate moving forward and think more before I press post.
I’m not used to the sun, it gets to my head.
HughBlue2I’m not used to the sun, it gets to my head.
😁👍
The wolves fans I’ve spoken to all said Doyle struggles in the double pivot role. It might be the case he’s ok in the championship but in the epl he struggles.
It was also pointed out that at Sheffield United he played an advanced midfield role for them. I just can’t see him taking Iwata or Paik’s place as they both provide the grit and yardage we require from our defensive two.
Going to be interesting seeing how this plays out.
I have only read the original post.
for me he is a number 9. He has all the attributes needed and im positive he will score goals in the championship this year.
He needs to add some strength to his game but he will go far with us.
ClaptonThe wolves fans I’ve spoken to all said Doyle struggles in the double pivot role. It might be the case he’s ok in the championship but in the epl he struggles.
It was also pointed out that at Sheffield United he played an advanced midfield role for them. I just can’t see him taking Iwata or Paik’s place as they both provide the grit and yardage we require from our defensive two.
Going to be interesting seeing how this plays out.
That makes sense and maybe my memory of him at Sheffield was wrong, I just thought they had McAtee playing that advanced role when he was there.
I agree with Paik and Iwata but if either of them go down injured we have no one on the same level. Creating viable rotation options that don’t mean a massive drop off in quality are essential to us doing well.
HughBlue2ClaptonThe wolves fans I’ve spoken to all said Doyle struggles in the double pivot role. It might be the case he’s ok in the championship but in the epl he struggles.
It was also pointed out that at Sheffield United he played an advanced midfield role for them. I just can’t see him taking Iwata or Paik’s place as they both provide the grit and yardage we require from our defensive two.
Going to be interesting seeing how this plays out.
That makes sense and maybe my memory of him at Sheffield was wrong, I just thought they had McAtee playing that advanced role when he was there.
I agree with Paik and Iwata but if either of them go down injured we have no one on the same level. Creating viable rotation options that don’t mean a massive drop off in quality are essential to us doing well.
I think positionally he and Leonard are very similar - played a fair bit as AM coming up but then almost all their first team games have been deeper.
I'd imagine a lot driven by a) getting them involved as much as possible and b) fitting in other players - if you had Doyle and McAtee, and can fit them both in, surely you would play both?
JourneyOnbrierleyblueStanno has scored 36 goals in 91 games for the club.
And those within the game, and who report on the game, recognise that he was a pivotal part of the England squad that won the tournament.
And some fans think he isn't quite good enough for us?
Shows you can’t understand the subtleties of an argument.
No one is questioning his ability, no one has is questioning his goal scoring record. I literally said how important he was in England winning it.
My question was on his position. Is he a number 9, I say not really, some others say no, some others say yes.
Where else is his best position in a front four because technically he can play all four roles. Is it on the right well yesterday showed defensively speaking maybe not.
I personally think it’s on the left but then I feel you then deprive the team of a proper left winger if you chose to play him there.
So subtle the same argument has been raised about a thousand times in the last year. It’s actually a bit tedious to put it mildly.
HughBlue2Doyle is a holding midfielder who is not dis-similar from Iwata or Paik, he has elements of both. He is being brought in to add competition to those 2 not to become the 3rd of a midfield 3. The only logical people to put further forward are either Leonard (his natural position) or Willumsson. If Davies doesn’t rate those 2 then he needs to bring in someone else.
I agree with the whole sentiment of Stanno though. No one is questioning his ability, only the best tactical role for him. People need to stop getting so hurt or taking things personally when things get literally just questioned.
It’s clear to see Stansfield could benefit from having someone to play off either as a target man or a more advanced number 10 role than the one used last season. I would also add that Davies’ system nullified some of Stanno’s qualities that had gotten goals in the Champ. That is why his open play goals were down. His strengths are running in behind and stretching defences, hard to do that in a team that was having 70% of the ball and playing on the floor in mostly short passing against teams always trying to park the bus.
People saying Stanno is hated or even that people in this thread are questioning his ability are either sensationalist, incapable of reading properly or both.
It’s tactics to get the best out of him being debated not whether as a player he is good or not.
Anyway rant over, suns out, hopefully the club announce some fun stuff this week.
Exactly Stanno is the ideal counter attacking player, he is the ideal John Eustace player. We’ve got a top player it’s now about making sure he’s a good fit for how Davies sees the game and I think it’s worth discussing that instead of people getting upset for it even being brought up.
newblueJourneyOnbrierleyblueStanno has scored 36 goals in 91 games for the club.
And those within the game, and who report on the game, recognise that he was a pivotal part of the England squad that won the tournament.
And some fans think he isn't quite good enough for us?
Shows you can’t understand the subtleties of an argument.
No one is questioning his ability, no one has is questioning his goal scoring record. I literally said how important he was in England winning it.
My question was on his position. Is he a number 9, I say not really, some others say no, some others say yes.
Where else is his best position in a front four because technically he can play all four roles. Is it on the right well yesterday showed defensively speaking maybe not.
I personally think it’s on the left but then I feel you then deprive the team of a proper left winger if you chose to play him there.
So subtle the same argument has been raised about a thousand times in the last year. It’s actually a bit tedious to put it mildly.
My response about subtlety is in relation to people who then think just by raising the question you are questioning Stansfields ability, record etc etc
Btw subtlety and underexposure are not the same things.
JourneyOnnewblueJourneyOnbrierleyblueStanno has scored 36 goals in 91 games for the club.
And those within the game, and who report on the game, recognise that he was a pivotal part of the England squad that won the tournament.
And some fans think he isn't quite good enough for us?
Shows you can’t understand the subtleties of an argument.
No one is questioning his ability, no one has is questioning his goal scoring record. I literally said how important he was in England winning it.
My question was on his position. Is he a number 9, I say not really, some others say no, some others say yes.
Where else is his best position in a front four because technically he can play all four roles. Is it on the right well yesterday showed defensively speaking maybe not.
I personally think it’s on the left but then I feel you then deprive the team of a proper left winger if you chose to play him there.
So subtle the same argument has been raised about a thousand times in the last year. It’s actually a bit tedious to put it mildly.
My response about subtlety is in relation to people who then think just by raising the question you are questioning Stansfields ability, record etc etc
Btw subtlety and underexposure are not the same things.
But a genuine question which I’ve asked twice in this thread and not been given an answer.
If he’s not a number 9, who could we sign better at number 9 that would join us?
Docky91JourneyOnnewblueJourneyOnbrierleyblueStanno has scored 36 goals in 91 games for the club.
And those within the game, and who report on the game, recognise that he was a pivotal part of the England squad that won the tournament.
And some fans think he isn't quite good enough for us?
Shows you can’t understand the subtleties of an argument.
No one is questioning his ability, no one has is questioning his goal scoring record. I literally said how important he was in England winning it.
My question was on his position. Is he a number 9, I say not really, some others say no, some others say yes.
Where else is his best position in a front four because technically he can play all four roles. Is it on the right well yesterday showed defensively speaking maybe not.
I personally think it’s on the left but then I feel you then deprive the team of a proper left winger if you chose to play him there.
So subtle the same argument has been raised about a thousand times in the last year. It’s actually a bit tedious to put it mildly.
My response about subtlety is in relation to people who then think just by raising the question you are questioning Stansfields ability, record etc etc
Btw subtlety and underexposure are not the same things.
But a genuine question which I’ve asked twice in this thread and not been given an answer.
If he’s not a number 9, who could we sign better at number 9 that would join us?
It’s not been answered because the assertion has never been we need someone better. You’ve posed a question in response to a non existent claim.
Saying he’s not a number 9 doesn’t automatically mean you’re saying we need a better number 9.